M V . 1. Age 49 eyars, occ: agriuclture, "R/HQ Tallihalli, taluk savanur MFA 6088.08 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 10:11 DAY or DEcEMBER',e.z_ed9'lj'g. 2 K BEFORE THE I-ION'BLE MR.JUsTxci:'B.s.i?A*,:§1:;V'1 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPE;a.;:'Nf§>l.6ossl'/zoog Between: 1.
The Divisional Controller,
NWKRTC, Hubli divisio’ln~~,.«_ _ _
Gokul road, I-Iubli, (but –wro.ng1yff }
Shown as the Divisional M-anager; _ _
In the Cause title bef0re’1viACT) * ‘
. Self 1nsurance_l_lf1;n.1(:lL’
‘
(but wrongly shown’ as’ KSRTC ,–
Shanthinagar, Banga1,0fe_27 iri the
Cause title’ before ‘M’AC’i’._ ” ” e
Both are. repre’seiV1te-dlbyilitslC.
, Chief ‘E4-§lWfAOff1Cer.”
A”x_V(By’S1fi.FlS,Dai:a1i, Adv)
APPELLAN Ts
Raf;1ar’2iia’,’ /0 Siddappa Kuri,
Haveri.
V’ “Age 41 years, occ: Milk Dairy Work,
Smt. Shantawwa, W / 0 Ramanna Kuri,
MFA 608808
R /o Tallihalli, Taluk Savanur,
Dist. Haveri.
RESPONDEN’i’-$_’ 8 ~
This appeal is filed under 173(1) of MV Act§l_:agaihvst__’lthe” _
Judgment and award dated 31/ O1 / 2008 passed V in “MVC
No.308/2005 on the file of the Civil JL;dge(Sr._Dn}= –.a:1:dlA.M–ACT,
Haveri awarding compensation of R.fJ;5O’,O’0Q/7.7 withlinterest
6% p.a. from the date of petition till d¢Do9_-M… * .
This appeal coming on .for..__ordersV_ this ci’ayj;vthe C;oulrt_
delivered the following:
V
The appellants are ilk and award
passed by the llilribulnal, Haveri, in MVC
No.308/2005: “‘s:srs’pshsat1on in a sum of
Rs.2,50,¢lClil/is B_heemavva aged 17 years.
2, esrentsgf moved the claims Tribunal
contending inter ‘alia-that’ her daughter was doing milk vending
“”~bi1si1je5e-.sEandvp_ was “earning Rs.6,000/– per month. As the post
disclosed the age of the deceased as 17 years
and. a’slPW– diydlnot produce any document to establish that
Cher daughterl was doing milk vending business, the Tribunal
the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/– p.a.
MFA 6088.08
considering the deceased as a
non earning member. Adopting the relevant multiplier’~.of~.ip16
dependency is worked at Rs.2,40,000/-. Towards _
and affection, a sum of Rs.5,000/- is awarded~’~
sum of Rs.5,000/ — is awarded towards’ funeral 4erx.pe.n’se8s’;8:’Thu;s,l
in all Rs.2,50,000/- is awardedf
3. I have heard the lear_ned~v.cou_nse1.appearing for the
appellants.
4. Though’ -the c~o\ti.nsel”;«submits that the
Tribunal wasg-in 8quantifying’:tl1eV_ compensation without
deducting anyiiarnouritp tovvards_personal expenses, having due
regard to the ‘totaiity’oifVt.he..ifa’cts and circumstances involved in
the present cased, ‘particularly, the evidence on record which
8 .d–iscl”u–ses?–_th.at* even a’s”‘p’ér the post mortem report the deceased
years_’_.and was helping her parents by carrying on
house hold .wo–rk apart from milk vending business, even if is to
– be said that the deceased was not doing milk vending business,
8’1{iee.pin’g in mind the age of the deceased and the avenues of
[fvarious works available in the village and the resultant
_. Vpkmv .. «
MFA 6088.08
opportunity to earn and support the family, I find that the
amount of Rs.2,50,000/– awarded for the death of Bhe.einavya
cannot be said to be unreasonably excessive so as to “‘v:?arrai:.t’ .
interference. The compensation awarded .’bei11g’_’v_ii;1st”_a11_d
reasonable, the matter does not Call :_for-5ar1y ‘Airi’terfe:renfee_;
Hence, this appeal being devoid. of ‘merits deisegves to
dismissed.
Accordingly, the appeal is””dis_inis’eed. The amount in
deposit shall be sent to theiCl_aizi1s, .fo1′.disbursa1.
pppp ._